At Inter Parliamentary Union meeting in Geneva:

Opposition move quashed

By Manjula FERNANDO

The Government squashed a move by main Opposition UNP to bring in a resolution on the imprisonment of Sarath Fonseka at the Human Rights Committee of the Inter Parliamentary Union last week.

Former Minister of Human Rights, Mahinda Samarasinghe and Minister Nimal Siripala de Silva led a team consisting military officials to counter the whipped up allegations by the Opposition to put Sri Lanka on the mat, hurt the image of the country and gain international sympathy.

Minister Samarasinghe speaking to the Sunday Observer from Geneva, soon after their triumph said the HRC of the IPU which represents the rights of parliamentarians in 155 countries, following their representations decided to drop the proposed resolution on Sarath Fonseka and this was yet another victory for the Government.

"On the last day of the sessions on October 5 the Committee was to take up public resolutions concerning Sri Lanka. Some were on the number of MPs killed in the past including D. M. Dassanayake, Joseph Pararajasingham, Raviraj and T. Maheswaran.

"After our representations the committee decided that the case on Sarath Fonseka did not warrant a public resolution. That was a great victory for the country," Minister Samarasinghe said.

Twice a year, the Governing Council of the IPU adopts resolutions concerning alleged violations of human rights of parliamentarians in different countries. Before these documents are made public, each case is scrupulously studied by the Union's HR Committee, which prepares corresponding draft resolutions and submits them to the Council.

In the case of ex military chief, the delegation of Sri Lanka discussed with the Committee in an 'open and candid dialogue' and provided certain information to the Committee relating to the allegations.

"I sought an appointment with the committee and we were heard at noon on Monday Geneva time," the Minister said.

Clarifications were made in response to questions raised by the Committee Members and the Sri Lankan delegation responded to several queries relating to the detention, trial and incarceration of the former military Chief.

"All the members of the committee were present to hear our case.

President of the committee is a former Foreign Minister of Mexico and it consists of five members representing the five geographical regions of the world," he said.

It was stressed that every step taken in relation to the Courts Martial and Trial before the High Court were done in full accordance with the Constitution and laws of Sri Lanka. They have pointed out that the Courts Martial was properly constituted tribunals under the law and trials under military law were universally accepted judicial proceedings in relation to persons subject to military law.

The delegation has reiterated that parallel systems of military tribunals and civil Courts exist in all jurisdictions. Furthermore the appellate/superior Courts of Sri Lanka emphasise that all safeguards to ensure a fair trial apply to Courts Martial in Sri Lanka.

It was explained that Fonseka had been convicted by the first and second Courts Martial and that the verdicts had been confirmed by the Confirming Authority under the Army Act. Accordingly, after the second conviction, he was committed for a period of 30 months in Welikada Prison.

"We pointed out that he has not sought the several avenues of redress that he could resort to under the Sri Lankan law in repealing or squashing the sentence served on him by the Court Martial."These include an application for review under the law, to the President for a pardon under Article 34 of the Constitution, an application for a prerogative writ to the Court of Appeal and a Fundamental Rights petition to the Supreme Court.

He could even seek to ask for repealing the verdict of the Court Martial from the Military.

The delegation noted that no such application had been made by Fonseka to date, referring to a statement by him which appeared in a privately owned newspaper on October 2 in which he has asserted that he would not seek pardon from anyone.

"Without having resorted to avenues available to seek a redress he went before the committee to see if a resolution can be adopted against the country. This is once again playing out a political agenda."

Minister Samarasinghe said the delegation also explained the conditions of his prison term. "We stressed that he will be treated like any other inmate and that the allegation that he was a political prisoner was incorrect."

Ministers Samarasinghe and Nimal Siripala de Silva assisted by other delegates explained that there were doctors on call in the prison hospital. If he needs any special medical attention, the services of specialist consultants will be provided to him just like any other prisoner.

The delegation also outlined that, whilst in detention prior to conviction, Fonseka, was provided with accommodation facilities equivalent to that of an Admiral of the Navy and that adequate ventilation and medical care was supplied in addition to visits from his family and lawyers on a daily basis.

Upon imprisonment he will have access to his family six days a week Conviction debars Parliament for seven years

It has also been pointed out that Fonseka is now under a constitutionally mandated disability, thus debarred from sitting and voting in Parliament following his conviction, for seven years.

Asked why the decision was taken to prosecute Fonseka after he was permitted to retire, the delegation clarified that the prosecution was initiated only after a full investigation.

The Committee on the Human Rights of Parliamentarians acknowledged that Fonseka was granted access to lawyers and counsel before and during the prosecutions. The delegations also provided a summery of the charges against the former military chief to the HRC of the IPU.

With regard to the safety of Fonseka while in Prison, the delegation stated that steps have been taken to ensure his safety.

As a result of the interaction between the IPU Committee, no decision was taken with regard to framing a resolution for submission to the IPU Governing Council concerning the allegations made in respect of the former military chief.

In another development the government team also made representations that Dr. Jayalath Jayawardena MP was no longer in need of special security given the peaceful environment prevailing in the country since the defeat of the LTTE.

There was a public resolution in Geneva one year ago that he had not been provided with sufficient security.

We pointed out that the threat level has disappeared and that Dr. Jayawardena cannot be treated in a special way to other MPs. the IPU's Govering Council decided to discontinue discussing allegations made in this regard under its public examination procedure.

Following protests by the Government delegation of the attempt by Dr. Jayawardena to gate crash the sessions the committee decided not to permit his entry. It is reported that he had reprimanded Sri Lanka's acting head of mission in Geneva for this 'calamity'.

The Committee however decided to follow up on investigations into several cases involving deaths of Lankan Parliamentarians.

The Sri Lankan delegation that appeared before the Committee included Minister of Plantation Industries, Mahinda Samarasinghe, Minister of Irrigation and Water Resources Management, Nimal Siripala De Silva, MP Nirupama Rajapaksa, Secretary-General of Parliament, Dhammika Kitulgoda and Deputy Inspector-General of Police Asoka Wijetilleka.

UNP was represented by Akila Viraj Kariyawasam and the TNA by Suresh Premachandran.